On Nov 21, 2006, at 11:44, Ronan Lucio wrote:
> Why I always see tutorial talking about subversion + Apache
> and almost nothing about subversion + svnserver?
>
> I should be wrong, but Apache integration doesn´t seem to be
> the more secure option.
>
> What do you think about svnserver?
Both Apache and svnserve are fine servers. Neither is inherently
"better" than the other; both are good for different purposes.
svnserve can do less, but can be faster. Apache offers more options,
in particular relating to authentication.
Both Apache and svnserve can be set up insecurely, or securely.
Apache can use the http protocol, which is insecure, or the https
protocol, which is secure. svnserve can use the svn protocol, which
is insecure, or tunnel over ssh using the svn+ssh protocol, which is
secure. You as system administrator need to decide whether you should
use a secure or insecure protocol. Insecure protocols are a bit
faster, which can be a consideration if hardware resources are
limited, but if your repository is accessible outside of a corporate
intranet (that is, available on the Internet) and the contents should
not be publicly accessible (as in, you offer password-protected
access), then you should use a secure protocol.
Instructions for setting up both are in the book:
http://svnbook.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 21 20:22:13 2006